MICHAEL SKIDMORE V. LED ZEPPELIN, No. 16-56057 (9th Cir. 2019)
Annotate this CaseThis opinion or order relates to an opinion or order originally issued on September 28, 2018.
Download PDF
FILED FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUN 10 2019 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT MICHAEL SKIDMORE, AS TRUSTEE FOR THE RANDY CRAIG WOLFE TRUST, Plaintiff-Appellant, No. 16-56057 D.C. No. 2:15-cv-03462-RGK-AGR Central District of California, Los Angeles v. ORDER LED ZEPPELIN; JAMES PATRICK PAGE; ROBERT ANTHONY PLANT; JOHN PAUL JONES; SUPER HYPE PUBLISHING, INC.; WARNER MUSIC GROUP CORPORATION; WARNER CHAPPELL MUSIC, INC.; ATLANTIC RECORDING CORPORATION; RHINO ENTERTAINMENT COMPANY, Defendants-Appellees. U.S. COURT OF APPEALS MICHAEL SKIDMORE, AS TRUSTEE FOR THE RANDY CRAIG WOLFE TRUST, No. 16-56287 D.C. No. 2:15-cv-03462-RGK-AGR Plaintiff-Appellee, v. WARNER/CHAPPELL MUSIC, INC, Defendant-Appellant. and LED ZEPPELIN; JAMES PATRICK PAGE; ROBERT ANTHONY PLANT; JOHN PAUL JONES; SUPER HYPE PUBLISHING, INC.; WARNER MUSIC GROUP CORPORATION, ATLANTIC RECORDING CORPORATION; RHINO ENTERTAINMENT COMPANY, Defendants, THOMAS, Chief Judge: Upon the vote of a majority of nonrecused active judges, it is ordered that these cases be reheard en banc pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 35(a) and Circuit Rule 35-3. The three-judge panel disposition in this case shall not be cited as precedent by or to any court of the Ninth Circuit. Judge Collins did not participate in the deliberations or vote in these cases. 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
